KDE Applications 16.04.0 packages available for packagers
Albert Astals Cid
aacid at kde.org
Thu Apr 14 22:03:27 UTC 2016
El dijous, 14 d’abril de 2016, a les 14:21:24 CEST, Eric Hameleers va
> On Thu, 14 Apr 2016, Albert Astals Cid wrote:
> > El dijous, 14 d?abril de 2016, a les 13:42:18 CEST, Eric Hameleers va
> > escriure:
> >> On Thu, 14 Apr 2016, Albert Astals Cid wrote:
> >>> At the usual location.
> >>> Haven't had time to compile yet, will try to get to it on monday since
> >>> this
> >>> weekend i'm away at Akademy-es.
> >>> REVISIONS_AND_HASHES file at https://paste.kde.org/pfq4epsxp
> >>> Cheers,
> >>> Albert
> >> Albert, there is a great many new tarballs:
> > We do Beta and RC for a reason, seems you're realizing a bit too late ;)
> Well... Keeping a KDE package repository uptodate with the ever
> evolving Frameworks, Plasma and Application tarballs is already taking
> enough time just when tracking stable releases. We are a small team,
> KDE packaging is just one of the things I do. Stuff like LibreOffice,
> Chromium, multilib compilers and Slackware Live come on top. Know what
> - I pass on Beta and RC versions.
> >> libksieve
> >> messagelib
> >> libgravatar
> >> libkdepim
> >> kdgantt2
> >> incidenceeditor
> >> eventviews
> >> grantleetheme
> >> kdepim-apps-libs
> >> mailimporter
> >> minuet
> >> libkleo
> >> kdepim-addons
> >> pimcommon
> >> mailcommon
> >> kleopatra
> >> calendarsupport
> > There are more new tarballs, minuet, ktp-call-ui, kde-l10n-ast at least I
> > also pointed a list to the new tarballs in old emails about KDE
> > Applications 16.04, i'll leave as an exercise for you to search for it.
> Helpful, as always. But I can read diffs of directory listings thank
> you. It takes me exactly one command to get a listing of tarballs that
> are not yet being used in my build framework, so this is a irrelevant
No, it's not.
People (I included) have been known for not realizing there's new tarballs,
you're workflow may be better than the workflow of those people, but don't
complain to me for reminding you there are more "new tarballs" than the ones
on your "new tarballs" list.
> I am interested in *build order* .
> >> I assume these belong to KDEPIM. Where is their build order documented
> >> - also in relation to the other pre-existing tarballs?
> > In their CMakeLists.txt, in the kde-build-metadata repo and in the totally
> > random order i use to build packages that seemed to work last time (don't
> > take this as anything official) http://paste.ubuntu.com/15838970/
> Please understand this.
> As a distro packager, I would welcome a simple piece of documentation
> written by the developer that is *not* a CMakeLists.txt file. If you
> develop software and cut that into 20 tarballs, it does not cost you
> blood to write up what a packager needs to do with them.
> If every distro needs to figure out a build order, you introduce
> randomness in the resulting packages and therefore you make it
> a lot more difficult to troubleshoot the resulting bugs when
> end users report them back to you.
You're complaining to the wrong guy, i'm just the sad bastard that creates and
publishes the tarballs because noone else wants to do it.
Some people (not sure if you included) think i have some kind of power over
the rest of developers, that's not how it is. Sorry i tried to help!
> Now that paste is more like something of a serious answer to a serious
That was actually the joke answer, i wouldn't expect you to follow that crap
list, the proper answer is the kde-build-metadata one since that is what CI
and kdebuild-src use.
> You do have some interesting differences in build order,
> compared to me. I will figure something out locally, as I do want my
> target audience to experience the new Plasma/Applications sooner
> rather than later.
> > Cheers,
> > Albert
> Cheers, Eric
More information about the release-team